I have no love for Wal-Mart, but what did the Obamanistas and the rest of the liberal do-gooders think was going to happen? Companies and people always act in their OWN best interest. Corporations and small businesses are not going to willingly accept lower profits when Obamacare mandates, rules, and regulations clearly provide a way to not incur additional costs. If you provide 99 weeks of unemployment, people have less incentive to find a job. If you provide foodstamps, subsidized housing, phones, cable and heat to people, why should they work? If you tell a company that all employees who work over 30 hours per week MUST have healthcare provided by their employer, the employers will make sure their work force is made up of people who work 29 hours per week.
Guess who will pick up the tab for Obama’s miscalculation? YOU
Was it really a miscalculation, or was this his plan all along?
Walmart’s New Health Care Policy Shifts Burden To Medicaid, Obamacare
Posted: 12/01/2012 10:14 am EST Updated: 12/01/2012 12:42 pm EST
Walmart, the nation’s largest private employer, plans to begin denying health insurance to newly hired employees who work fewer than 30 hours a week, according to a copy of the company’s policy obtained by The Huffington Post.
Under the policy, slated to take effect in January, Walmart also reserves the right to eliminate health care coverage for certain workers if their average workweek dips below 30 hours — something that happens with regularity and at the direction of company managers.
Walmart declined to disclose how many of its roughly 1.4 million U.S. workers are vulnerable to losing medical insurance under its new policy. In an emailed statement, company spokesman David Tovar said Walmart had “made a business decision” not to respond to questions from The Huffington Post and accused the publication of unfair coverage.
Labor and health care experts portrayed Walmart’s decision to exclude workers from its medical plans as an attempt to limit costs while taking advantage of the national health care reform known as Obamacare. Among the key features of Obamacare is an expansion of Medicaid, the taxpayer-financed health insurance program for poor people. Many of the Walmart workers who might be dropped from the company’s health care plans earn so little that they would qualify for the expanded Medicaid program, these experts said.
“Walmart is effectively shifting the costs of paying for its employees onto the federal government with this new plan, which is one of the problems with the way the law is structured,” said Ken Jacobs, chairman of the Labor Research Center at the University of California, Berkeley.
For Walmart, this latest policy represents a step back in time. Almost seven years ago, as Walmart confronted public criticism that its employees couldn’t afford its benefits, the company announced with much fanfare that it would expand health coverage for part-time workers.
But last year, the company eliminated coverage for some part-time workers — those new hires working 24 hours a week or less. Now, Walmart is going further.
“Walmart likely thought it didn’t need to offer this part-time coverage anymore with Obamacare,” said Nelson Lichtenstein, director of the Center for the Study of Work, Labor and Democracy at the University of California, Santa Barbara. “This is another example of a tremendous government subsidy to Walmart via its workers.”
In pursuing lower health care costs, Walmart is following the same course as many other large employers. But given its unrivaled scale, Walmart’s policies tend to influence American working conditions more broadly. Tom Billet, a senior consultant at Towers Watson, a professional services firm that works with large companies to develop benefit plans, said other companies are also crafting policies that will exclude some part-time workers from medical coverage.
Billet portrayed the growing corporate interest in separating out part-time workers as a reaction to another aspect of Obamacare — the new rules that require companies with at least 50 full-time workers to offer health coverage to all employees who work 30 or more hours a week or pay penalties.
Several employers in recent months, including Darden Restaurants, owner of Olive Garden and Red Lobster, and a New York-area Applebee’s franchise owner, said they are considering cutting employee hours to push more workers below the 30-hour threshold.
“In the past, firms were less careful about monitoring whether someone was full- or part-time,” Billet said, noting that some of his clients were planning to track workers’ hours more carefully. “I expect health plans like Walmart’s won’t be uncommon as firms adjust to this law.”
For Walmart employees, the new system raises the risk that they could lose their health coverage in large part because they have little control over their schedules. Walmart uses an advanced scheduling system to constantly alter workers’ shifts according to store traffic and sales figures.
The company has said the scheduling system improves flexibility and efficiency. But in recent interviews with The Huffington Post, several workers described their oft-changing schedules as a source of fear that they might earn too little to pay their bills. Many said they have begged managers to assign them additional hours only to see their shifts cut further as new workers were hired.
The new plan detailed in the 2013 “Associate’s Benefits Book” adds another element to that fear: the risk of losing health coverage. According to the plan, part-time workers hired in or after 2011 are now subject to an “Annual Benefits Eligibility Check” each August, during which managers will review the average number of hours per week that workers have logged over the past year.
If part-time workers hired after Feb. 1, 2012, fail to reach the 30-hour threshold, they will lose benefits the following January, according to the book. Part-time workers hired after Jan. 15, 2011, but before Feb. 1, 2012, must work at least 24 hours a week to retain coverage and will also be subject to an eligibility check each year. Those hired before 2011 aren’t subject to the minimum hours requirements or eligibility checks.
As for full-time workers under the plan, those who lose hours and slip to part-time at any point during the year will see their spouses’ health coverage dropped immediately. Those workers will also lose their dental and life insurance policies in the following pay period, according to the plan.
Some Walmart workers who are excluded from the company’s health care plans are likely to become eligible for Medicaid under the Obamacare expansion, which aims to replace a patchwork of standards now set by individual states with one minimum federal threshold — income below 133 percent of the federal poverty line, which for an individual currently comes to $14,856. However, the Supreme Court ruled earlier this year that the decision to expand the program is voluntary for the states. At least eight states, including Texas, have said they will not expand the program, which would leave Walmart workers there with one less option.
Part-time workers who lose their Walmart insurance but earn too much to qualify for Medicaid should be able to buy insurance through the health care exchanges to be established under Obamacare — essentially, online marketplaces offering an array of health care plans.
For workers who do qualify for health coverage under Walmart’s new policy, the latest package represents an upgrade over previous plans. Walmart’s health plans began covering 100 percent of spine and heart surgeries this year at select hospitals and medical centers. They also include a smattering of preventative care services required by Obamacare.
But the company’s plans still leave many workers facing significant financial distress in the event of major illness. Under the new policy, one major offering, the so-called Health Reimbursement Account Plan, costs nonsmoking workers $34.80 a month — a seemingly affordable sum. Yet it comes with an annual deductible of $2,750, a hefty expense given that half of Walmart’s hourly workforce earns no more than $10 an hour.
While a shifting of Walmart employees to Medicaid rolls may increase the burden on American taxpayers, it is likely to be a better deal for the workers themselves.
“The packages Walmart is providing for low-income people aren’t offering very much coverage except for catastrophes,” said Linda Blumberg, a senior fellow at the Urban Institute, a left-leaning think tank. “It’s likely they’ll be better off going with a government-sponsored plan.”
Anonymous says:
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
5 
25
4th December 2012 at 11:49 am
Wyoming Mike says:
Anonymous – Bullshit, make your own deal. Who is to define living wage anyway? To most morons like you, that would include directv, an obamaphone, a new car, eating out several times a week, etc. Clueless.
Good for Walmart, I’d do the same. You get what you vote for.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
21 
3
4th December 2012 at 12:03 pm
AWD says:
That’s just brilliant. And nobody can survive on 29 hours a week of Wal Mart pay. All the better reason to just quit and get on welfare and disability (which includes free healthcare). Every single corporation in this country would just love to dump all their employees into somebody else’s healthcare plan, i.e. Medicaid, that they don’t have to pay for. The savings and profit would be enormous.
I’m surprised the HMO lobby hasn’t put up more of a fight, as they won’t be able to extract tens of billions in profit from the private sector premium payers. Of course the government wants everyone on Medicaid or Medicare. They want to nationalize and centrally control the healthcare system and all its facets. In ten years, we are going to have a banana republic healthcare system run by bureaucrats, the IRS and union government employee retards. You’ll have to petition Washington to be able to get a mole removed.
Medicaid is a joke right now. Only 30% of primary care doctors accept it, and less than 5% of specialist accept it. It’s free, but basically worthless, and will become even more worthless in the future as the Medicaid rolls increase exponentially.
I like this picture, it couldn’t be more true….
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
15 
1
4th December 2012 at 12:14 pm
Nonanonymous says:
Anon, yes, and there’s a US Constitution that declares you have the freedom to pursue one, as well as limits the role of government. How’s that hope and change working out for you? Although, to be fair, it isn’t Obama’s fault, he’s a witless agent. Our two party system has failed this country. The only thing left to do is mitigate the fall out, and have faith in God. He led the Israeli’s out of Egypt, he will do the same for his elect today, and for all time.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
7 
1
4th December 2012 at 12:47 pm
card802 says:
I believe this is exactly what the fed gov wants. They want a crisis, they want the people to demand the fed gov save them with a total take over of the health care system.
The same will happen with personal retirement plans. We need one more stock market loss and the people will demand the government take their money and protect it.
Fucking evil.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
11 
1
4th December 2012 at 1:12 pm
Thinker says:
I agree with Card… I think the government is purposely pushing companies into reducing overall hours of each employee in an attempt to increase overall employment. Several progressive think tanks have advocated for shorter work weeks for everyone, with 2-3 people filling a job that traditionally only took 1 person. So “unemployment” drops, but so does overall standard of living. But then, it’s more “fair” to everyone. And since government provides “free” healthcare and benefits to all, it works. On paper, anyway.
Just look at the European economies that progs think are ideal — Norway, Sweden, etc. They all use a model like this. I’m really beginning to think this is what they’re trying to accomplish here.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
7 
1
4th December 2012 at 1:55 pm
ThePessimisticChemist says:
No offense Anon, but thats idiocy.
The guy who pushes carts for 15 hours a week in no way deserves medical coverage, SS or vacation/holiday pay.
Like or Dislike:
3 
2
4th December 2012 at 2:15 pm
AWD says:
People, knowingly or not, voted for socialism when they voted for Obama. And socialism is what we’re going to get. The state runs everything. People will be begging for it. The 100 million already are.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
8 
1
4th December 2012 at 2:34 pm
The Watchdog says:
HZK must be seeing patients right now. Can’t wait for her to chime in on this one.
Like or Dislike:
2 
1
4th December 2012 at 3:02 pm
Stucky says:
“If you tell a company that all employees who work over 30 hours per week MUST have healthcare provided by their employer, the employers will make sure their work force is made up of people who work 29 hours per week.” ———- Admin
No problem-o!!
The governemt will simply change the requirement to 25 hours.
Walmart will change people’s hours to 24.
The governemt will simply change the requirement to 20 hours.
Walmart will change people’s hours to 19.
The governemt will simply change the requirement to 15 hours.
Walmart will change people’s hours to 14.
The governemt will simply change the requirement to 10 hours.
Walmart will change people’s hours to 9.
The governemt will simply change the requirement to 5 hours.
Walmart will change people’s hours to 1.
At that point, everyone will be an hourly worker ………… Liiterally.
Mission Accomplished.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
8 
1
4th December 2012 at 3:08 pm
Eddie says:
I have to laugh.When times were better,our patients who worked at Walmart had a hell of a time getting off work to come to an appointment. They were under the gun from their managers and feared for their job if they took a half day off to get a tooth fixed.
This is not a place at which I’d like to work. Just sayin’.
Like or Dislike:
4 
1
4th December 2012 at 3:31 pm
Llpoh says:
I am very seriously considering abandoning the USS Titanic for better climes. This shit will not end well, and the land of liberty is no more. I have options and I am really thinking of getting the hell out of Dodge. I do not want to be seen as a milk cow anymore.
That the government is waging war on those that produce is appalling, and fortunately I do not have to take it if I choose not to. Last one out turn off the lights.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
14 
0
4th December 2012 at 3:56 pm
Administrator says:
Llpoh
Can I live in your 5,000 sq ft guesthouse?
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
7 
0
4th December 2012 at 3:59 pm
Llpoh says:
Just bring some beer, and you will be welcomed with an opener and open arms.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
5 
0
4th December 2012 at 4:07 pm
Stucky says:
” I have options and I am really thinking of getting the hell out of Dodge” —– llpoh
Wow. Given a long list of TBPers wanting to get out of dodge …. you would have been the LAST person I’d have picked.
Where would you go?
Here’s a thought for you to consider; write a thread about it. Yes, there have been little mini discussions here about leaving Dodge. Maybe I missed the larger discussions, if any. But you … you’re such a damn good writer. And your reasoning and logical thought process is second to none.
So, it would be a great read. Myself … I don’t give it a LOT of thought … but, on the other hand, the thought never completely leaves my mind either. I’ll bet more than a few folks here are in a similar frame of mind.
So, consider it. Otherwise, blow me. 8)
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
6 
0
4th December 2012 at 4:30 pm
AWD says:
We should start our own country. Lipoh can manufacture something, Admin can account for something, Stucky can be our spiritual leader, Eddie can be our dentist, a couple of doctors, Colma can build us all houses. We’ll use Lipoh’s money and buy an island in the Carribean.
This one’s for sale
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
8 
0
4th December 2012 at 4:43 pm
ASIG says:
Lloph
The main thing holding me back from moving on that decision is figuring out where to go.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
6 
0
4th December 2012 at 5:23 pm
Eddie says:
I like islands actually. Living in the Caribbean is a little like living in the Wild West. It is freer the further you get from the centers of power.
I once strongly considered moving to the USVI, and someone I influenced with my rants about it actually did, and I was able to spend some time hanging out down there with him and his wife.
But white men often go crazy in the islands. There is a long history documenting that.
And the Free Shit Army is alive and well in the U.S. territories.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
4th December 2012 at 5:52 pm
llpoh says:
ASIG – how old are you? If you are under 35, with a degree, it is a no-brainer. Australia. Or NZ. But really, Australia.
If you are older, then the options are reallly places like Ecuador, Belize, Panama, etc. Not so good as Australia. But cheap and relatively safe. Other options are Thailand, Viet Nam, Spain, Portugal.
But under 35s with degrees (that is roughly the immigration criteria) need to consider Australia.
Like or Dislike:
2 
0
4th December 2012 at 6:02 pm
llpoh says:
If you have enough funds, the world is your oyster, and renting/locating outside the US without emigrating is very easily done.
Like or Dislike:
3 
0
4th December 2012 at 6:03 pm
ASIG says:
68 and enough funds.
I have some well of relatives in the Philippines, but I’ve never been there. I could live there like a king even without selling what I have here.
Like or Dislike:
4 
0
4th December 2012 at 6:17 pm
ASIG says:
Well of >> well off
Like or Dislike:
2 
0
4th December 2012 at 6:24 pm
llpoh says:
ASIG – I personally like Portugal. Pretty cheap, reasonably advanced, safe, pretty good climate. A lot of folks like South America. For me, the political situation is pretty unstable, and safety is an issue. But It is cheap and reasonably safe. Phillipines would be cheap, but there are occassional issues with safety, but given your contacts it may be really good.
Like or Dislike:
4 
0
4th December 2012 at 6:27 pm
Stucky says:
I’ve been hearing about the wonders of Belize. So, I spent some time on an extensive expat Belize forum site, http://www.belizeforum.com/belize/ … looked through several posts, and condense them here, edited only for brevity and readability. It was a mixed bag, both positive and negative. I’m only listing the negative … truth often hides out there.
=====================================================
1. Language, the presence of amenities such as cable television, email, Internet, running water makes it appear that Belize is the southern outpost of the USA. It’s not!! Cultural values and mores are VERY different once you delve below the surface.
2. The banking system and the utility companies suck. We even use the phrase, “bank rage” to describe our feelings about one of the local banks. You better balance your own checkbook daily because the banks make many mistakes, especially if you’re American.
3. Your possessions, your loved ones, your pets, etc., are YOUR own personal responsibility to guard. There are almost no systems in place to help you with that responsibility. I don’t even know the phone number for the police station in Placencia because I have no faith that if I needed them they’d (1) answer the phone, or (2) come to help even if they did answer the phone.
4. Rules are different. The people who make and enforce the rules are different. Sometimes there are no rules. Sometimes there is a set of rules for you, and a different one for everyone else. The rule you followed last week may be different this week.
5. Owning a successful business in Belize is not impossible, only nearly impossible. You will have to create your own supply chains – and have several back-up plans. Capital at a reasonable cost is non-existent. The labor pool is very small. Whether or not your employees show up for work is a daily guessing game. Communication is very expensive. The bureaucracy is very slow. Services are in short supply
6. Everybody is related to everybody else. If we grouse about so and so to another Belizean, we’ll usually find out in a few days that so and so is the aunt or uncle of whomever we were grousing to.
7. Pay attention to gossip — it’s really the primary source of information in Belize. Information is a very valuable commodity in Belize, hard to get, and those who have it, don’t like to let share it.
8. Belize is a country with a population hardly bigger than a small city in the U.S. It lacks the people resources, not to mention the tax base and financial resources, to get things done in the way North Americans expect. If you’re a lets-get-it-done type person or an Alpha Dog, you will hate it here.
9. Belize doesn’t have a cost of living. It has several costs of living. The actual cost of living in Belize can vary from almost nothing to sky high. You can live in a luxury four-bedroom house on Ambergris Caye, with air conditioning, telephones and faxes, a dishwasher, microwave and cable TV, U.S. food in your pantry and Jack Daniels in your glass, and you can spend thousands a month. Or you can live in a small house in Cayo, or around P.G., with no phone, eat beans and rice and rice and beans, with local rum to drink, maybe someone to help clean and cook, for US$400 a month. Some condos in Belize go for more than US$500,000, but I know one happy Belize resident who built and equipped his small house, using his own labor, with thatch from nature and timbers from a lagoon, for US$4,000, and that includes furniture and kitchen equipment.
10. Belize has no Wal-Marts. No K-Marts. No Home Depots. No Circuit Cities. No McDonalds. No B&N bookstores. It has a Wendy’s, but not the Wendy’s you’re thinking of . While this lack of homogenization is in Belize’s favor, it also means that you can’t go down to your neighborhood hyperstore and select from 40 kinds of dish soap, or 18 brands of underwear. Rum may be US$7 a bottle, but Cheetos may be US$5 a bag. Every CD player, nearly every piece of plumbing and electrical equipment, every car and truck, every pair of scissors, every bottle of aspirin, is imported, and often transshipped thousands of miles from one port to another before it gets to the final destination in Belize. Then it’s carried on a bus or under a Cessna seat somewhere else. Some items simply aren’t available in Belize, or supplies may be spotty. Bags of cement, for example, sometimes are in short supply. To get ordinary items such as building nails or a certain kind of auto part, you may have to call several different suppliers and wait months for delivery.
11. Belize is a truly multi-cultural society, with Creoles, Mestizos, Maya, Garifuna, Asians, and North Americans. One thing is for certain, though: In this mix, North Americans, come in last and have very limited power, at least politically Most Belizans don’t care about Americans. You are the outsider and always will be. What they like is your money. Money talks in Belize, of course, as it does everywhere. The exception is for those Americans who put their energies in charity or volunteer work where they can make a real difference. [Stucky’s Note: I guess Belize has a Free Shit Army also.]
Like or Dislike:
3 
0
4th December 2012 at 7:02 pm
marissa says:
Back from a month in Ecuador scouting retirement potential.
Although not my personal paradise, I liked Ecuador plenty well enough to live there. God knows I like it a helluva lot better than Seattle or anywhere else I’ve lived in the States.
Ecuador has implemented a number of foreigner retirement friendly policies which make it attractive. The cost of living is affordable and the Ecuadoran people are a pleasure. The country has several attractive cities, a variety of climates, and 1,400 miles of Pacific coastline. Food is abundant, cheap, and unmodified.
Life is still real down there. People do actual things for a living like make stuff and fix stuff and there is a strong culture of the arts. There is a very strong foundation of family–babies babies everywhere, the children are extremely well cared for. Health care is abundant and affordable.
It is a developing country, but Correa is investing in infrastructure, education, and improving the economy for the actual good of the people.
And as an added bonus, Ecuador is no friend of the American government. Not. This is a benefit that cannot be overstated.
I hated to leave and come home.
But we’ve lived in countries I didn’t like as well as Ecuador, and I still hated coming back to the USSA. We are outta here in 3 years, max.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
7 
0
4th December 2012 at 7:09 pm
Stucky says:
Speaking for myself, the reason I even think about getting out of Dodge is because I believe (consciously or subconsciously) that the grass is greener on the other side.
In my more lucid moments, I realize that’s ALWAYS a sucker’s bet.
Like or Dislike:
4 
0
4th December 2012 at 7:15 pm
AWD says:
I’ve been to the Philippines and I’d live there. Especially if you’re single. And that’s usually the deciding factor. Most American women would never, ever stand it three months in a 3rd world country, let alone live there. If you’re married, you options are very, very limited.
I’ve been to Central America. It’s not that nice, and not that safe. It’s vastly overrated, especially if you don’t speak Spanish. It nice, tropical and warm, but you’d have to build yourself a bunker so you didn’t get robbed or kidnapped.
I’ve been to South America. It’s fairly safe, but you must speak Spanish or Portuguese. It’s dirty and not very stable politically. You’d have to keep your money someplace else. I wouldn’t recommend South America unless your running/hiding from something or someone.
I’ve been to New Zealand and Australia. I could live there in a heartbeat, especially Australia. I don’t see how living there would be much better than living here though. They are going down with the rest of world in the coming collapse. There’s no telling what it’s going to be like on the other side there or here. I suppose it can’t be much worse than the socialism here though.
I lived in Korea, been to China and Japan. Don’t bother. They don’t accept outsiders much.
I’ve been to Thailand, and want to go to Viet Nam. Very nice, safe, men are treated like Kings. Thailand is an amazing place. I could live there no problem. The islands there are paradise.
I’ve been to the South Pacific. Fiji Tahiti, Rarotonga. Very nice, but very expensive. If you have the cash, there isn’t a better place to live than the South Pacific.
My two cents worth. By the time I get enough money to move, things will have collapsed, and I have children here still.
My question is always (while I’m trying to save for retirement) is what is going to happen to our fiat currency, or the currency of any other nation? Savers and cash could very simply be wiped out in a collapse. Then what? Catch 22, if you don’t save you can’t move away, if you do save, you could be wiped out anyway.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
6 
0
4th December 2012 at 7:19 pm
llpoh says:
Stuck – Belize is not perfect and not my choice. But you can buy a passport, no taxes, etc. No part of Sth America is what I would call good, but some like it. For instance, you can apparently live reasonably well in Ecuador for around $1200 a month for a couple.
Like or Dislike:
2 
0
4th December 2012 at 7:24 pm
marissa says:
AWD, both New Zealand and Australia have overbearing nanny governments that are on the same path of citizen control as the US, the UK, and Canada. Although they may be tidy and orderly and first world, all of the above are taxing their citizens to death and nano regulating entreupreneurism into the graveyard.
South America is a wilder horizon where governments have bigger fish to fry than to tell you how to run your personal life. And Spanish isn’t a hard language to navigate.
Like or Dislike:
3 
0
4th December 2012 at 7:28 pm
Stucky says:
Eureka!! I got it folks!!
Bhutan! Get this … Bhutan measures its success in terms of GROSS NATIONAL HAPPINESS (GNH). Bada boom bada ching. I’m outta here.
God knows where it is. I think on some mountain in the Himalayas. I think they make lighters.
.
.
“In his opening address [to the United Nations] the Bhutanese prime minister, Jigmi Thinley, referred to a “deeply troubled” world, suggesting that we’d lost our way in our “obsession for creation of wealth at any cost”. He’s an inspiring and articulate man for whom happiness is intrinsically linked to sustainability and preserving the natural world. There are considerable differences between Bhutan and the developed nations, but their GNH concept has global relevance and the underlying methodology is solid. It’s based on 72 different indicators across nine domains, which include community vitality, time use and psychological wellbeing.”
Like or Dislike:
2 
0
4th December 2012 at 7:31 pm
Stucky says:
llpoh
Got it. Anyway, wasn’t directing the Belize stuff at you.
Maybe Belize is Paradise. How the hell do I know? Who can one believe anymore these days?
My own take-a-away from reading that website. Do NOT simply pick a place, even if much research was done, and then move there permanently. There is only one way to determine if the country one selects is the right choice , and that is, GO LIVE THERE FOR AT LEAST SIX MONTHS. (sorry for shouting). Marissa’s “scouting retirement potential” doesn’t count.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
4th December 2012 at 7:40 pm
llpoh says:
AWD – you said re Australia “They are going down with the rest of world in the coming collapse.”
Ummmm, no. So sorry, wrong answer.
They will indeed suffer a bit, but going down is not an option. Why? Farmland out the wazoo relative to population. Coal out the wazoo and every other orifice relative to the population. Natural gas. Iron ore. Uranium. Gold. Bauxite. Copper. Tin. Rare earths. Nickel. tungsten. Zinc. Lead. Some oil. Lots of fishing grounds, if they can keep the Chinks, Japs, and Beaners out of their coastal areas. Reasonably well educated population. Low deficit relative to the rest of the world. Ability to grow their population massively (by percentage) if they want. Stable political system. Public debt = 6% of GDP (wowza!).
“According to the Australian Energy [18] the economically demonstrated reserves to production ratios for bituminous coal and lignite in Australia are 111 years and 539 years respectively,”
Biggest threat to Australia – risk of invasion by Indonesia (low) or China (who knows?).
Like or Dislike:
1 
1
4th December 2012 at 7:40 pm
AWD says:
My point was, their currency and banking system are going down with the rest, sorry.
When I went to Australia, it was two Aussie dollars for my one U.S. dollar. Now they’re at parity. If you’re moving there, better do it quick, while they still accept U.S. dollars at all.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
5 
0
4th December 2012 at 7:56 pm
Administrator says:
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
6 
0
4th December 2012 at 8:06 pm
llpoh says:
Admin – one thing about Australia, just about everything there can kill you. They even have a type of seashell critter that can do you in. They have the most poisonous snakes, spiders, fish in the world. Crocs and sharks take people every year. The dingoes do too, as do the fucking kangaroos every so often. However, Australians are like most other folks – they almost entirely live in the cities, and many have never seen a kangaroo.
Like or Dislike:
3 
0
4th December 2012 at 8:16 pm
DaveL says:
AWD says:”You’ll have to petition Washington to be able to get a mole removed.”
You mean to tell me it’s going to take more than four years to get that black pimple off my ass?
Like or Dislike:
3 
0
4th December 2012 at 8:18 pm
DaveL says:
Stucky says:”I’ll bet more than a few folks here are in a similar frame of mind.”
72 tomorrow. I’m closer to moving into the urn that moving to another country, although Mexico and then poiints further south are only a short drive away.
Like or Dislike:
3 
0
4th December 2012 at 8:25 pm
underfire says:
I turned my ship into the wind some years ago. I figure I might as well go down right here. But I’m old enough, 60.
I’m trying to pass on the great fortune in life that I’ve had and to maybe provide some degree of safety for my comrades and extended family, whoever might need it. That consists of farming, ranching, dirt, isolation, long hours and low pay. But not many are interested yet.
I look at what’s coming and I feel like I’m in a row boat trying to gun the engines and steering into a tsunami.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
5 
0
4th December 2012 at 8:28 pm
Hope@ZeroKelvin says:
Just to let you guys know the results of my informal survey of 100 people after the passage of the Obamacare bill.
48 doctors
12 nurses
40 just random people, most in clerical/shift work, not current patients.
Number who actually have read or have some knowledge of the Obamacare bill = 2 (both docs)
Number who realize that “full time” employment is 30 hours/week = 2 (both doctors).
The following are questions I did not ask the docs:
Number who think that they can make ends meet on 30 hours full time/29.5 hours part time (regardless of benefits) = ZERO.
Number who are not worried about qualifying for Medicaid if hours are cut but do not, in fact, know the income cut off levels for Medicaid = ZERO.
Number who think that having Medicaid means access to state of the art care = 100%.
Number who are not worried about losing their jobs, going on either disability, “student loans” or living with spouse/parents = 38 of the 40 others and 6 of the 12 nurses.
Number who think taxing “the rich” a la Obama, will solve the debt/deficit problems = 30 of the 40 randoms, 15/16 nurses. (Note: ZERO of the docs agreed with this.)
Questions I asked all 42 docs:
Number that have had their tax man or accountant analyze what is currently known about the effects of Obamacare on their practices = 5 of the 42.
Number that don’t give a shit and are planning to retire end of 2013 = 32 of the 42.
Number that are cashing out of anything that gives capital gains, all stock, etc, prior to 1/12013 = 25 of the 42.
Number that plan to stay in business but move all employees to part time in 2014 or downsize staff = 8 of the 10 that plan on being in business in 2014.
I had some other questions but in the interests of time, thought I would just post the ones most illustrative of my contention that Obamacare will cause a cascading failure of employment, investment capital, business and available doctors.
We.Are.Doomed.
Like or Dislike:
3 
0
4th December 2012 at 3:19 pm
AWD says:
“Number (doctors) that don’t give a shit and are planning to retire end of 2013 = 32 of the 42.”
That’s about the national average, which is 84%. Yes, 84% of doctors now plan to retire and/or leave medicine ASAP.
But it’s okay, there are plenty of PA’s and nurse practitioners still around. They can’t do much, and don’t know much, but who cares. They’ll run what’s left of the healthcare system. And who needs full time work? Not the people that support Obama, they get paid not to work. We are, in fact, doomed. HZK is correct, as usual.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
4th December 2012 at 3:31 pm
Hope@ZeroKelvin says:
@AWD: The really awful thing, that has mady my depression even worse, is that NOBODY REALLY WANTED TO TALK ABOUT IT. Especially if there were any blacks in the room. I didn’t (and don’t) give a shit and just barge ahead anyway.
Of my sample, none of the docs were black, only 3 of the nurses (the ones that thought disability or student loans were good) and of my random folks, only 10 were black.
Seriously, I was as calm as possible, no Ann Barnhardt eyeball rolling, just trying to see what they knew.
Oh buddy, we are in for some serious shit when the layoffs, downsizing and business/practice closures start.
You guys do your own poll. Tell me what you find.
Like or Dislike:
3 
0
4th December 2012 at 3:38 pm
Eddie says:
Stucky
Not only can you not move to Bhutan, but they only let 10,000 tourists a year come to visit. They do not want to contaminate their population with Europeans and Americans. It’s a very interesting country. They are Tantric Buddhists, I hear they decorate the exterior of temples and even other building with giant paintings of penises.
Hope
Interesting survey. I’m glad I’m healthy. You aren’t retiring are you? What if I get the Big C?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
4th December 2012 at 3:46 pm
AWD says:
I’ve done informal polls for months.
I ask questions to the myriad of state employees around here “what are you going to do when the state goes bankrupt and can’t pay you anymore?” or to state employee pensioners who are 52 now.
I ask disability recipients “what are you going to do when the government goes bankrupt, and you don’t get a check anymore”.
I’ve known these people for years, so they’re not offended, but they just give me a blank stare. They don’t counter with ‘the government won’t go bankrupt’, or ‘they’ll raise taxes and tax rich people’. They just have no response.
In the U.S.A in 2012, ignorance is bliss.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
4th December 2012 at 3:49 pm